« People You Hate to Love | Matthew Saroff's Blog | What the Panetta Nomination Means (Inside Capitol Hill Baseball Edition) »
Time to Dump Reid?
Truth be told, I've had thoughts about dumping the Democratic Party Congressional leadership regularly, every waking minute in the case of Steny Hoyer,
but I'm beginning to think that Reid may do a passable job of
maintaining order in the Democratic caucus, he is is simply hopeless
when dealing with opponents of that caucus.
In l'affaire Joe (Lieberman), he collapsed like a bunch of brussel sprouts too overcooked for consumption at a British boarding school, and now he is mishandling the seating of both the Burris (Blagojevich) and Al Franken.
First, we now have his "stand on principle," followed by statements yesterday that negotiation was possible.
Then we have the reports that he's having the Senate Parliamentarian reject Burris's credentials for lack of a Secretary of State signature, which might be inspired, except for the fact, as Majikthise notes, the governor has a stack of papers pre-signed by the SoS for convenience, and may have used one, and that the Illinois Secretary of State has explicitly said that his signature is not required.
Follow this up with a generous dose of credible reports that Reid lobbied Blagojevich against appointing a black man to replace Obama. (Yes, I know, he didn't, lobby against a black person as Senator, just all the possible black politicians in the state who might have the stature to do this. It's a distinction without a difference.)
Finally, we have his tactics backfiring against Al Franken, with the Republicans promising a filibuster against seating the Senator-Elect from Minnesota using his arguments.
Also note that any delay in seating either of them makes it more difficult to break a filibuster: 98 Senators means 59 votes (all the Dems + Lieberman + 2 Republicans), 99 Senators means 60 votes, (all the Dems + Lieberman + 2 Republicans), and 100 Senators means 60 votes ((all the Dems + Lieberman + only 1 Republican) to get cloture.
Seriously, I'm beginning to think that he's moonlighting as Senate Majority Leader, and that his day job is as the coach of the Washington Generals.
Cross posted from 40 Years in the Desert.
In l'affaire Joe (Lieberman), he collapsed like a bunch of brussel sprouts too overcooked for consumption at a British boarding school, and now he is mishandling the seating of both the Burris (Blagojevich) and Al Franken.
First, we now have his "stand on principle," followed by statements yesterday that negotiation was possible.
Then we have the reports that he's having the Senate Parliamentarian reject Burris's credentials for lack of a Secretary of State signature, which might be inspired, except for the fact, as Majikthise notes, the governor has a stack of papers pre-signed by the SoS for convenience, and may have used one, and that the Illinois Secretary of State has explicitly said that his signature is not required.
Follow this up with a generous dose of credible reports that Reid lobbied Blagojevich against appointing a black man to replace Obama. (Yes, I know, he didn't, lobby against a black person as Senator, just all the possible black politicians in the state who might have the stature to do this. It's a distinction without a difference.)
Finally, we have his tactics backfiring against Al Franken, with the Republicans promising a filibuster against seating the Senator-Elect from Minnesota using his arguments.
Also note that any delay in seating either of them makes it more difficult to break a filibuster: 98 Senators means 59 votes (all the Dems + Lieberman + 2 Republicans), 99 Senators means 60 votes, (all the Dems + Lieberman + 2 Republicans), and 100 Senators means 60 votes ((all the Dems + Lieberman + only 1 Republican) to get cloture.
Seriously, I'm beginning to think that he's moonlighting as Senate Majority Leader, and that his day job is as the coach of the Washington Generals.
Cross posted from 40 Years in the Desert.
Advertisement
You lost me at the brussel sprouts, I think.
January 5, 2009 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
You've never eaten cooked veggies at a British private school, have you.
My brother described brussel sprouts flattening to disks on his plate from overcooking.
January 5, 2009 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just thought you were applying the sportswriter school of similie stretching to political blogging.
January 5, 2009 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just thought you were applying the sportswriter school of similie stretching to political blogging.
January 5, 2009 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
That Harry Reid has the position he does makes me wonder what really goes on in the gym in the basement. And that's not a dirty joke.
January 5, 2009 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe the other Senators like him because he has a cute butt?
January 6, 2009 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hoyer is arrogant, egotistical, and reactionary; Reid (as far as we can tell) is just politically inept, gutless, spineless, out of touch, clueless, feckless, and muddle-headed. It is a measure of the overall inferior caliber of present-day Democratic officeholders that both these bozos appear to be acceptable to their respective caucuses. "Of all the cowards, no other is so cowardly as the average politician." [Rep. c. A. Lindbergh, 1917]
January 5, 2009 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whatever you think of Harry Reid--and I don't agree with the criticism of him here--I am sick and tired of people criticizing him over the Lieberman issue. He wanted to take away the turncoat's chairmanship. Obama asked him not to. If you want revenge against Lieberman, fine, I'm with you. But blame the right guy for it, ok? Obama figured he was better off keeping Lieberman where he could watch him and Reid deferred to the party's new leader. Would you rather he had told Obama where to go and how to get there? If he had, I can guarantee you would be attacking Reid for doing that.
January 5, 2009 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
First, If Reid had had a brain, he should have started the historical fact that when people do what Lieberman did, even when they stay in the party, they lose their seniority.
The fact is that Reid made his statement about consequences, then walked backward from it for some time before Obama felt the need to say anything.
Reid seems to do this again, and again, and again, and again.
January 5, 2009 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Revisionist history. Obama didn't want Lieberman expelled from the caucus. Reid was the one who decided to impose no penalty at all and keep him as chairman on one of the most important committees.
Also, Reid would have sissed out even if Obama had remained silent. I cannot recall a bigger coward in government than Harry Reid.
January 5, 2009 11:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
actually, he put it to a vote and all the Democratic senators chose to leave Joe in his chair -- so let's be mad at the right targets.
Reid has next to no real power -- the senate majority leader is a toothless office. He is trapped by a unified GOP and a fractious democratic caucus, and he has no real tools of his own to use to get things done.
So yes -- he is not a great majority leader. But he is not horrible, it is not all his fault, and these kinds of arguments are not useful.
Contact your senator to complain about stupid stuff that happens in the Senate -- if they all hear enough, they might actually listen. Unless you are A) from Nevada, or B) a senator, Harry Reid has no reason to listen to you.....
January 6, 2009 9:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
There have been powerful Senate leaders. LBJ, and Mitch McConnel as for examples. It just depends on how the person sees his position and his capabilities. Unfortunately, Reid apparently sees himself as a guardian of Senate perogatives and not a leader of the opposition whose supposed policies are good for the country. While the Senate does have towering figures, Kennedy and our new crop such as Webb, the vision of the leader is what counts, and Harry does not have that vision. He is a man for the Senate, not the country.
January 6, 2009 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rec'd - any Democratic leadership is by default suspect if it sat idly by during any part of the last eight years.
January 5, 2009 11:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
They have been sitting idly by for decades in many cases, not just the last eight years. I say anyone with more than one or two terms in office should be suspect, in both parties.
January 6, 2009 9:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Give em hell Harry!
Damn,my bad ummm.........
Give em everything Harry, don't get yourself hurt!
Spineless, gutless, weak, impotent, eunuch.
January 5, 2009 11:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reid was stuck with the worst of all possible worlds. The media said we had a majority and we did not. 49-49. I do not have time to get into independents.
Now, if things will just cool down, we can have 59 instead of 49. We have enough power to keep liarman in his place. Then we woo the two nice ladies from Maine. Then Spector does not wish to seen like an asshole anymore.
And vuella (sp) we got it.
Lighten up people. We are in charge.
January 6, 2009 12:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
That isn't an excuse for his past or present weakness.
He's ineffective at best, horribly pathetic at his worst, which is 99% of the time. He's a docile weak leader. It's time for him to go.
January 6, 2009 12:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I like Durbin. He is really good on tv. He takes no shit and he smiles when he fights back.
I like Barbara Boxer. I like my own Senator Klobachar. I think Webb is really something.
And I like the new guy from Montana who gets off the tractor and appears in the Senate every single day. He will act as Pro Temp all the time.
I like the new guy from Rhode Island. He lisps but he is really, really good on these committees.
We might use a good Blue Dog. I am open to it.
There are so many good minds in the Senate. So I am not going to argue the point that long.
But I have no animosity toward Reid. He had a tough job. We might have done better if we were the ones filibustering the whole goddamn time.
I like our Democratic Senators. There are so many good minds, good hearts and good spirits there.
January 6, 2009 1:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's an amazing spelling of "voila". [Note also there should be an accent grave on the "a". I lack skills to do it right.]
January 6, 2009 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
When leftys attack, they attack themselves, using the baited traps set out by their enemies. That's OK, the American left could actually be a threat to liberty, if it weren't for the lamers who ally with it.
Reid opposed Lieberman keeping the Homeland Security Committee chair. Obama did not, nor di a majority of the Senate Democratic caucus. You spin Reid's acceptance of the majority's will in a democratic process as bweing a cave-in. Good to know which side of representative governance you stand on: Kommissar.
The "credible reports that Reid lobbied Blagojevich against appointing a black man to replace Obama" were from an unamed source in a Chciago Sun-Times article, the same paper whose past "credible unnamed source" turned out to a Blagojevich mouthpiece, using the paper as a patsy party to his pay-for-play scheme. (I realise that self-centered net-toots have been much too busy creating news, than to actually have read the Blagojecivh/Harris criminal complaint, but it might be an educational experience, if you'd try to enlighten yourself. See: "particular" Sun-Times columnist in paragraphs, 97, 103 and 105 of the complaint. What is your definition of credible, and does Jason Leopold fit the description? rotflmao)
Are you truly asserting that Sen. Coryn(Holer-TX) suddenly decided to challenge the seating of Franken as a Senator, because of Reid's opposition to Burris? Must be a real exciting life to run backwards down timelines, Mr. Buttonhead...
It does provide me with great amusement to know that the new millennium leftists are as incompetent and ignorant as their 290th century progenitors though, but cheer up, all is not lost in your wonderland, you can always do a David Horowitz, and find credibility two decades out in the company of the right.
January 6, 2009 1:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. Nicely put. Seems nobody trashes democrats with as much relish as democrats trash each other.
January 6, 2009 2:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ever listen to the Rush Limbaugh show?
January 6, 2009 7:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you take that to the logical conclusion, this means that Reid has gotten the GOP to publicly accept his argument on Burris.
Thinking about this strategically, we know that Franken should ultimately prevail - delaying his seating doesn't change much in the long run. On the other hand Burris is racing time to get his seat. If they oust Blago before his butt hits the chair, Burris is done. So in the long run the ability to delay Burris is more important than seating Franken based on the caucus' stated objectives.
Since Reid is going to need GOP support in his delay of Burris, it seems to me he just got what he wanted - and what's best for the democrats(unless you want the ghost of Blago haunting democrats long after Blago himself is gone).
The GOP pretty much forced themselves to take the lead - and you are worrying about having to swing a single GOP vote on a theoretical cloture motion if it happens within a span of the next week or so?
This is just one of many reasons why Harry Reid is a senior senator, and you ... aren't. You can't see it - but there is a forest amongst all these trees.
January 6, 2009 2:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
DUMP.HIM.NOW.
January 6, 2009 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Harry Reid says he's working "on behalf of the people of Illinois" one more time I will have to hitchhike to DC and hurl a shoe at him. "The People of Illinois" did not elect that numbnut and don't need him to speak for us. Let Durbin talk - we actually ELECTED him.
As for Reid, I hope the people of Nevada wake up and elect a Dem with the balls to do the job well.
January 6, 2009 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Harry Reid says he's working "on behalf of the people of Illinois" one more time
You have a citation for this, or are you just talking out of your thinking end?
January 6, 2009 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damn skippy!
January 6, 2009 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink